Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755432AbZJAQfB (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2009 12:35:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753347AbZJAQfA (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2009 12:35:00 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:48890 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753123AbZJAQfA (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2009 12:35:00 -0400 Message-ID: <4AC4DA0F.2090104@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 01:34:23 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: jeff@garzik.org, mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, cl@linux-foundation.org, dhowells@redhat.com, arjan@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/19] workqueue: implement concurrency managed workqueue References: <1254384558-1018-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1254384558-1018-20-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20091001074959.dbdf6f6a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20091001074959.dbdf6f6a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (hera.kernel.org [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:34:26 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1439 Lines: 35 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 17:09:18 +0900 Tejun Heo wrote: > >> To solve the above issues, this patch implements concurrency-managed >> workqueue. > > Seems reasonable. > > This approach would appear to rule out the option of setting a work > thread's state (scheduling policy, scheduling priority, uid, etc) to > anything other than some default. > > I guess that's unlikely to be a problem if we haven't yet had a need to > do that, but I'd be a bit surprised to discover that nobody has done > that sort of thing yet? Nobody has niced up their workqueue threads? There were only two users in mainline which diddle with the worker kthread. The stop machine call which uses RT priority and osl which binds worker to cpu0. Both are updated not to do that in earlier patches. For most cases, I don't think it would matter. For special cases, given the rarity of them, I think we're better off with custom kthread for now. If they become more prevalent, we'll need to add support for it so that it can be done easier but even that turns out to be the case I think it would better to implement that separately from generic workqueue. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/